Andrews Ex Rel. Andrews v. Haygood
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1DissentJustice Hudson
Although I agree with the majority that “[Arkansas Department of Health & Human Services v. ] Ahlborn does not mandate a specific method for determining the medical expense portion of a plaintiff’s settlement,” the United States Supreme Court nevertheless did explicitly hold in Ahlborn that a State may not violate the anti-lien provisions of 42 U.S.C. §§ 1396a(a)(18) and 1396p by requiring a Medicaid recipient to reimburse it out of settlement funds designated for purposes other than medical care. 547 U.S. 268, 284-85, 164 L. Ed. 2d 459, 474 (2006). The terms of the settlement at issue here…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- United States Trust Co. of NY v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Arkansas Department of Health & Human Services v. AhlbornSupreme Court of the United States · 2006
- Bailey v. StateSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1998
- RH Bouligny, Inc. v. United Steelworkers of Amer.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1967
- Ezell v. Grace Hospital, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2005
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.